The Transport Workers Union asked the U.S. District Court to bar Southwest Airlines from imposing “emergency restrictions” on use of sick leave or challenging the use of sick leave taken in the past.

TWU Local 555 filed a lawsuit Tuesday in the Northern District of Texas that seeks a temporary and permanent injunction to stop the restrictions. The union said the emergency restrictions aren’t allowed in its contract with the Dallas-based airline.

The lawsuit said the airline “experienced operational difficulties during the cold weather in December, 2013, which continued into January, 2014. On January 7, 2014, SWA advised Plaintiff TWU Local 555 that it was imposing ‘emergency’ restrictions on employees’ use of earned sick leave.”

Southwest cancelled the emergency two days later. But, the union said, the airline “instead began to issue notices to employees that their sick leave use over the past two years would be examined in ‘fact finding’ or disciplinary meetings, another unilateral change” to the collective bargaining agreement.

The contract “limits such inquiries to 10 days prior to the notice of fact finding meetings,” the suit said.

The lawsuit said the union “met with Defendant on the morning of January 13, 2014, and SWA’s position has not changed, and it reserved the right to declare an emergency and impose sick leave restrictions it sees fit, in the future.”

TWU 555 represents about 10,000 baggage handlers, provisioning employees and other ground employees at Southwest. Its contract became amendable in June 2011, and management and union officials are negotiating on a new contract.

In a memorandum of law that accompanied the filing, the union stated:

In response to what it claimed to be a higher than usual number of workers taking ‘sick days’ — during flu season in Chicago, no less — SWA issued a memo to its ‘MDW Ramp Employees’ (hereinafter ‘the memo’) who work in Chicago, Illinois.

First, this memo purported to ‘declare a ‘State of Operational Emergency’ which was to remain in place until further notice. This ‘declaration’ was then used as the springboard for the unilateral imposition of new and burdensome procedures and requirements upon any Chicago terminal employee that dare use a sick day while working outside, day-after-day, during the dead of a Chicago Winter.

Though SWA’s purported justification for this unilateral change would be unlawful no matter what the ‘facts on the ground’ were, the truth of the matter is this — SWA’s Chicago operation was understaffed by twenty-two employees on the day it unilaterally declared a state of emergency; SW A has known of its staffing issues for several months; and SWA has resorted to mandatory overtime as a staffing tooL

With these conditions already in place, it should come as no surprise that during ‘cold-season’ in a city with one of the nation’s harshest winters, SWA would at some point find itself short-staffed. Rather than accepting responsibility for this problem coming-to-a-head, SWA decided to go beyond mandatory overtime to a unilateral change that stripped employees of their rights under the CBA.

As we remember, bitterly cold weather brought by the “polar vortex” disrupted operations for a lot of airlines in the northern tier of the country for a number of days during the time period cited by the union.

Using data from masFlight, here’s the percentage of flights that Southwest cancelled at Chicago’s Midway Airport over the past two weeks:

The three unions at American Airlines asked U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Sean Lane to approve the settlement between the U.S. Department of Justice and American Airlines and US Airways.

And approve it soon, they urged in a Thursday filing, saying American has been stalled since DOJ filed its lawsuit Aug. 13.

“In these circumstances, the competitive position of American is susceptible to damage while American is unable to undertake initiatives because of the uncertainty regarding its future. This Court should end that uncertainty,” the Allied Pilots Association, the Association of Professional Flight Attendants and the Transport Workers said in their filing.

“APA, APFA and TWU understand the many demands made on a federal bankruptcy judge, but respectfully request that the Court quickly grant the relief sought by Debtors in their Settlement Motion in order to give American and its employees the chance they deserve to compete on even footing as one of America’s great airlines,” the unions said.

At a Monday hearing, Lane will consider the Nov. 12 settlement between the DOJ and the airlines. He is to determine if the settlement changed the plan of reorganization enough that creditors and shareholders should be given another chance to vote on the plan.

The unions argued that the settlement had little effect on the plan and on investors. The fact that share prices for AMR and US Airways have gone up is an indication that the settlement had little impact on the plan’s viability, they stated.

They acknowledged that courts have sometimes put new requirements on a merger after a 60-day comment period imposed by federal law, but said a merger has never been undone because of that.

“But whatever minimal risk there may be of post-consummation divestitures would be a concern for post-consummation investors, not for this Court – and as reflected by market capitalization, investors are clearly unconcerned,” the unions stated.

“A bankruptcy court need not delay consummation of a Plan until every future contingency is resolved, but need only find the Plan has a ‘reasonable prospect of success’ and is workable,” they stated.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly told the US Airline Pilots Association on Tuesday that it can file its own brief in support of the US Airways-American Airlines merger.

But she put a lot of provisos on that approval. In particularly, she told the union, which represents US Airways pilots, to combine its brief with that of other American Airlines and US Airways unions if everybody is making the same points.

Here’s the meat of her order allowing the union to file an amicus curaie (friend of the court) brief (We’ve divided one long paragraph into several to make it more readable):

First, the brief must be filed by no later than November 15, 2013.

Second, the brief must not exceed eight (8) pages in length.

Third, the Court requests that amicus not include factual materials that will not be presented by the parties as part of the trial record. Instead, amicus should, where possible, focus its brief on legal arguments in support of its position.

To the extent amicus incorporate factual information not introduced and subject to cross-examination by the parties, this information will be disregarded by the Court.

Finally, the Court requests that amicus coordinate its filing with, and not reiterate any arguments made by, the other unions filing a joint amicus brief in this matter.

If it becomes apparent, after communicating with counsel for other union amici in this matter, that these briefs will be making the same arguments regarding the “benefits to the public” of an approved merger, the Court asks that amicus join a single union amici brief rather than filing a separate brief.

American Airlines and US Airways had objected to a separate USAPA brief, saying it would be duplicative.

The judge earlier on Tuesday had approved an amicus filing by parties in a private antitrust lawsuit that also seeks to block the merger, the so-called Fjord lawsuit after the lead plaintiff. In that case, the judge make similar requests not to duplicate others’ arguments, etc. She gave that group up to 25 pages.

Assuming this is the last of the amici requests, here’s the lineup of friends of the court that have Judge Kollar-Kotelly’s permission to submit briefs by Nov. 15:

– Transport Workers Union with Allied Pilots Association, Association of Professional Flight Attendants, the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA and the Communications Workers of America, AFL-CIO

– Committee of Unsecured Creditors in American Airlines’ bankruptcy case

– Charlotte Chamber of Commerce, the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce, the Dallas Regional Chamber, the Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce, the Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce, and the Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce

– US Airline Pilots Association

– Oneworld airline alliance

– Carolyn Fjord, et al., the private antitrust lawsuit and the only amicus in support of the U.S. Department of Justice lawsuit to block the merger.

In addition, Oklahoma Attorney General E. Scott Pruitt has served notice that he intends to file an amicus brief.

We haven’t heard from the US Airline Pilots Association in recent weeks as other US Airways and American Airlines unions asked permission to file amici curiae (friends of the court) briefs in support of the carriers.

Well, Thursday, we have.

USAPA, which represents US Airways pilots, asked U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly for permission to file an amicus brief in the Department of Justice lawsuit to block the carriers’ proposed merger.

Said USAPA in its motion:

USAPA plans to focus its brief on addressing, from the particular perspective of US Airways pilots, the benefits an approved merger between US Airways and American Airlines would provide to competition and to consumers. USAPA anticipates that its proposed brief would thus address, inter alia, (1) the benefits to the public of a viable airline with a substantial network of routes that can compete with the industry leaders on price, service, and quality, (2) the benefits to the public of airlines retaining experienced pilots, and (3) the benefits to the public of labor peace.

Judge Kollar-Kotelly on Oct. 9 granted the request of the Transport Workers Union (AA) to file an amicus brief. On Wednesday, she granted the request of the Allied Pilots Association (AA), Association of Professional Flight Attendants (AA), Association of Flight Attendants (US) and Communications Workers of America (US) to file a brief jointly with the TWU.

The judge she also approved amici request from the Oneworld airline alliance and four cities/airports that host large American and US Airways hubs.

She is still considering the request from various chambers of commerce in AA and US cities and the unsecured creditors committee in American’s bankruptcy case. DOJ objected to those requests, and the judge gave Justice until Monday to explain.

In Wednesday’s status hearing, Judge Kollar-Kotelly gave amici filers until Nov. 15 to file their briefs, and the parties to Nov. 22 to respond to those briefs.

(My apologies for getting USAPA’s name wrong in my first version, with an ‘s’ on Airline and no ‘s’ on Pilot.)

This American Airlines-US Airways lawsuit is getting awfully friendly.

The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors filed its own request Monday for permission to file an amicus curiae brief in favor of the American Airlines-US Airways merger.

The “friend of the court” motion follows a similar request Monday morning by four cities/airports for amici status in the U.S. Department of Justice lawsuit that seeks to block the merger, and others in prior days.

In its filing, the committee said it polled the parties. The airlines don’t object to the committee’s filing, but DOJ attorneys have objected, the committee disclosed.

The unsecured creditors committee reminded U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly that she had granted permission for it to submit an amicus brief in August when Justice and the airlines were disagreeing about whether the trial should start Nov. 12 (the airlines) or in early 2013 (DOJ).

“Here, given that the Statutory Committee represents the diverse interests of AMR’snumerous unsecured creditors and has a unique perspective concerning the bankruptcyproceedings and the merger, the Statutory Committee has a substantial interest in the outcome ofthis litigation and believes that its viewpoint will assist the Court in assessing the merits of thecase.

“The Statutory Committee’s amicus brief will explain in detail how Section 7 case law isappropriately applied in the context of a proposed transaction where one of the entities is inbankruptcy, including complexities that will result if the merger is enjoined.

“AMR’s current planof reorganization, predicated on its proposed merger with US Airways, is the only plan proposedto and voted on by creditors and stakeholders and confirmed by the United States BankruptcyCourt for the Southern District of New York presiding over AMR’s pending Chapter 11 case.”

In a related filing, four unions at American and US Airways told the judge that they and the Transport Workers Union have agreed to file one amici curiae brief covering all those unions.

Judge Kollar-Kotelly previously had granted permission to the TWU to file a brief. Last week, the Allied Pilots Association, the Association of Professional Flight Attendants, the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA and the Communications Workers of America had filed a separate request for permission to file an amici curiae brief.

The Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association has informed American Airlines mechanics that it won’t be able to launch an organizing attempt at American for one year.

And, AMFA officials are rethinking its “organizing philosophy as a whole,” the AMFA National Executive Council told AA mechanics and related employees in a Monday email.

AMFA had been at work trying to get signatures from more than 50 percent of the eligible American employees for some time so that it could cause a representation vote.

But the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, also trying to take the mechanics away from the Transport Workers Union, filed its signatures first. AMFA tried unsuccessfully to file its own signatures. Then the Teamsters withdrew their application in August.

The National Mediation Board rules state that it will not accept an application for representation for one year in several circumstances. One is a case in which an application to represent a group is docketed then dismissed, as in the case of the Teamsters and the mechanics.

NMB told AMFA the Teamsters effort bars another representation attempt for a year.

“We are saddened and deeply troubled at the course of action they [the NMB] decided to take, and furthermore at their interpretation of ‘unusual or extraordinary circumstances,’” the AMFA council stated.

It then repeated previous accusations that the TWU had somehow worked with the Teamsters to keep AMFA out. Those unions have dismissed those accusations.

“After all of your hard work and dedication, it is unfortunate that you have been told to wait when the overwhelming evidence pointed to the collusion of the IBT and TWU, and ultimately, the deceitfulness of the Teamsters,” AMFA’s message said. “The industrial unions have unconscionably manipulated the influence they have gained through your dues and work ethic into a ruse designed to steal away your participation in a free and democratic election to determine who represents you.”

Keep reading for the NMB’s rules on the one-year bar, followed by the AMFA council’s message.

With all parties having had their say, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ruled Wednesday afternoon that the Transport Workers Union will have amicus curiae status in the antitrust lawsuit that seeks to block the US Airways-American Airlines merger.

Colleen Kollar-Kotelly

However, the judge denied TWU’s request to be an intervenor in the case.

Earlier Wednesday, the TWU modified its request for intervenor or amicus curiae status – after the U.S. Department of Justice and the two airlines objected — to state that amicus curiae (friend of the court) status was sufficient.

The Transport Workers Union said Wednesday that the TWU is okay if it only gets amicus curiae, or “friend of the court,” status in the lawsuit challenging the merger of American Airlines and US Airways.

TWU had asked to be an intervenor in the lawsuit filed Aug. 13 by the U.S. Department of Justice. On Monday, it revised its request to be either intervenor or amicus curiae.

But, after both the DOJ and the airlines opposed the TWU’s full intervention Tuesday, the TWU said Wednesday it asks now for only the amicus status.

The DOJ and the airlines “express a significant shared concern: that nothing stand in the way of a prompt resolution of this litigation on the schedule set by the Court. TWU shares this concern, which it voiced in participating in the August 29, 2013 amicus curiae brief by the Unions,” the TWU brief stated.

“Thus, while TWU continues to believe that it is in the best position to protect the specific interests of its members in this litigation by articulating those interests to the Court directly, in light of the Parties’ concern that intervention might put at risk a prompt resolution of this litigation on the schedule set by the Court, TWU respectfully requests that the Court grant TWU’s alternative request, granting TWU ongoing status as amicus curiae,” the TWU stated.

The trial is currently set to begin Nov. 25, with final testimony on Dec. 16 or 17. The parties will make closing arguments Jan. 6, with U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly saying she hopes to rule by Jan. 10

American Airlines and US Airways said thanks but no thanks Tuesday to the request of the Transport Workers Union to intervene on their side in a lawsuit seeking to block the carriers’ merger.

So it seems the airlines and DOJ officials seem to be in agreement for once in the lawsuit brought by the U.S. Department of Justice to stop the merger on antitrust grounds.

The TWU filed a motion last week to intervene in the case, with a supplemental motion Monday. U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly gave the DOJ and the airlines until 5 p.m. Tuesday to respond, and TWU now has until 5 p.m. Wednesday to respond to their response.

“The Airlines greatly value the interests of TWU’s members and support TWU’s participation in this case as amicus curiae,” the carriers wrote in their response to the TWU’s request to intervene.

“There is no need for TWU to intervene, however, because the interests of TWU and its members in this case are fully aligned with – and thus adequately represented by – the Airlines. TWU’s motion to intervene should thus be denied,” 1 the airlines said in their response.

And “furthermore, TWU’s intervention would complicate the proceedings, potentially jeopardizing the trial schedule that the parties, the Special Master, and the Court are working to implement. TWU can fully achieve its goal of ensuring that its members’ interests are “adequately presented to the Court… by participating as amicus curiae along with other unions representing the employees of both Airlines,” the carriers argued.

“If TWU is permitted to intervene rather than simply act as amicus, these other unions and similar interested parties – all of whom can legitimately claim a deep interest in seeing the merger approved – may also seek to intervene, further complicating the tight trial schedule,” American and US Airways said in their response to the TWU request.

Now, TWU has until end of day Wednesday to respond to the carriers and the DOJ.

The U.S. Department of Justice said Tuesday it is opposed to letting the Transport Workers Union become an intervenor on the airlines’ side in DOJ’s lawsuit to block the American Airlines-US Airways merger.

In its response to TWU’s motion from last week and revised Monday, DOJ said TWU waited too long to ask. Besides, the airlines are representing TWU’s interest, the DOJ told U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly in the DOJ filing Tuesday.

“Despite closely monitoring this action since its inception and participating in an amicus brief at an earlier stage urging the Court to resolve this action on an expedited schedule, the TWU has waited until the eve of the close of fact discovery and only six weeks before the start of trial to file its request for intervention,” the DOJ argued. “This request is untimely.”

On the other point, the DOJ filing stated: “Moreover, the TWU’s interest in seeing the merger between US Airways and American Airlines completed is adequately protected by the current defendants.”

In addition to those points, “Finally, the TWU concedes that it ‘does not have an independent cause of action or defense to plead’ in this action,” Justice attorneys wrote.